Chhabra, Arpit M.

11009 Background: Gender & racial/ethnic leadership disparities have been independently identified in academic hematology/oncology (HO) and radiation oncology (RO). Here, we evaluate gender and racial/ethnic intersectionality from the trainee to the leadership level. Methods: All ACGME accredited HO and RO training program websites were queried to identify constituent trainees, academic faculty, program directors (PD) and department chairs (DC), with a leadership position defined as PD or DC. Individual gender & race/ethnicity was determined using externally validated software tools (Gender-API, NamSor, & Onolytics), publicly available descriptors, and image review. We grouped individuals into 6 categories: White Male (WM), White Female (WF), Asian Male (AM), Asian Female (AF), Underrepresented Groups in Medicine (as defined by AAMC) Male (URMM) and Female (URMF). The chi-squared goodness-of-fit test was applied to examine if deviations exist between the observed vs. expected proportions of gender/race dyads in trainees, PD, and DC compared to academic faculty. Results: We identified 7,722 individuals from 2019-2020: 1,759 trainees (HO=1525; RO=234), 5,726 faculty (HO=4834; RO=892), 242 PD (HO=149; RO=93) and 237 DC (HO=144; RO=93). Leadership positions were most often comprised by WM (52.6%), and least often comprised by URMF (2.9%). Combined HO/RO analysis revealed significant differences in the observed representation of trainees & DC vs expected levels based on total faculty, respectively: WM (33.7% & 60.3% vs. 42.3%), WF (19.2% & 13.9% vs. 22.3%), AM (20.75% & 16.9% vs. 16.4%), AF (17.9% & 2.5% vs. 12.7%), URMM (4.09% & 5.5% vs. 3.5%) and URMF (4.3% & 0.8% vs. 2.8%), p<0.01. No differences were seen between PD vs total faculty. On subset analysis, there were significant differences observed in HO programs at the trainee, PD and DC levels compared to total faculty, whereas significant differences in RO programs were seen only at the DC level [Table]. Conclusions: Gender & racial/ethnic disparity is present in academic oncology. Specifically, women of all races/ethnicities are proportionally underrepresented in DC positions in HO and RO programs. These data can serve as a benchmark to raise awareness and monitor progress towards a more balanced workforce in oncology.[Table: see text]

Abstract Purpose: The optimal salvage treatment for malignant glioma after prior radiotherapy (RT) is not well established. Proton therapy (PT) is an attractive treatment modality for reirradiation (ReRT) of recurrent disease; however, data are limited.Methods: The prospective, multi-institutional Proton Collaborative Group (PCG) registry was queried for patients with malignant glioma who previously received RT and underwent PT-ReRT between 7/2011-10/2018. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results: 109 consecutive patients were identified. Median follow-up was 11.2 months and median time interval (TI) from prior RT (median 59.3 Gy) to PT-ReRT (median 49.6 Gy) was 45.7 months. Primary histology was glioblastoma (n=62), oligodendroglioma (n=26), and astrocytoma (n=20). Median PFS and OS was 6.1 and 11.1 months, respectively. On UVA, improved PFS was associated with oligodendroglioma (HR 0.39) and astrocytoma (HR 0.55) histologies, WHO Grade III (HR 0.36), TI (HR 0.989), surgical resection (HR 0.39), and PT-ReRT dose ≥50 Gy (HR 0.59) (all p<0.03), while improved OS was associated with oligodendroglioma histology (HR 0.35), WHO grade III (HR 0.33), ECOG 0 (HR 0.47), TI (HR 0.985), and PT-ReRT dose ≥50 Gy (HR 0.58) (all p<0.04). Late Grade 3 toxicities occurred in 5.6% of patients with no attributable acute or late Grade 4-5 events.Conclusion: In the largest series of glioma PT-ReRT reported to date, retreatment appears well tolerated with acceptable outcomes and favorable toxicities compared to photon historical controls. Dose escalation achievable with PT may improve outcomes for well-selected patients.